First off, thats not fair, @Morvran is in every thread and any he isn’t is he soon will be. You just need to say the word BOL and he will be here.
Secondly, I’d like to find evidence there is a way to get missile rails on the PIDS+ pylons to make them more useful. Loads of players want to see this.
Hold on here, who is arguing? I found where you guys can find some references yourselves. I given you a lead, do what you want with it.
Why should I provide anything? So that it ultimately sits in queue? Like the maverick?
it looks like ADU-552/A, but different.
Its not the only way to make them useful.
Have you looked into the helmet sight capability that PIDS+ (BD configuration only) offers that visually marks threats as well as even gunfire?
It was rudimentarily modelled in the TWS at release, but was a OP as it detected heading, velocity and range data at max range as the radar. Real world, its a passive optical system and cannot measure these elements direct. It should only detect the object and measures range over time.
A full track file cannot be determined with optical sensors in reality, and the information oversaturated the player as you can see. Simple detection markers without track file information with set detection range when the pylons are equipped would be best instead of only when tws is selected.
PIDS+ offers 360 degree protection, its not in-game either at all. Player uses one pylon, they should get half the coverage.
It was removed and made a comeback, even added to the F-15E pod, but only difference was that detected targets disappeared after a certain time limit has expired and was not updated via tws. They since removed it a second time.
Because otherwise there’s no proof and you’re probably talking out of the side of yer mouth
nothing new isnt it
as seen in the Mig-29 thread
Did you say BOL?
Its a video game forum, not a trial.
Look, I like you Kiz. I must admit. You are actually reasonable and do weigh the evidence presented. I have seen that in your other discussions.
When you ask for additional evidence, I will make an effort to provide.
I apologize for coming off the rail regarding the use of an old manual and the logic that it should somehow apply to every MiG-29 ever. I know that it’s not a narrative you devised and continue to circulate on the forum intentionally.
I took that frustration out on you and again, I apologize.
To start off on a clean slate, stand-by. I will work on this in detail.
F-16s with PIDSs are also missing the triple rack rocket pods as an option.
Though I was looking for triple Maverick evidence before reporting that.
Also why only 1 pylon? We could simply use them with bombs and drop them at the start of the match if it was on the inner pylons
That’s how it is in real life - PIDS is only ever fitted on the middle station.
Partly because F-16s practically always carry fuel tanks on the inner stations, but also decoys fired from an inner pylon will hit any pylons and munitions on the stations further outboard.
Carrying 4x PIDS is impossible, and carrying anything other than AIM-9 or AIM-120 outboard of a PIDS is also impossible.
If it was true to life, the PIDS pylons would actually also have to carry fewer countermeasures (max 60 per pylon instead of 90) when the plane is carrying AAMs on an outboard station.
To do so IRL requires what’s called the “flare-up modification” (FUM) that angles the countermeasures downwards in order that they don’t hit the outboard AAMs when the flares are dispensed - angling the dispensers means not as many countermeasures fit in each bay.
But that only works just enough to clear LAU-129 and missile like AIM-120 that already have relatively low profile below the wing, and not anything bigger.
There’s also actually a couple of bombs like GBU-24 that are currently supported on the PIDS in game, that can’t be carried on PIDS IRL because the tail fins don’t have enough clearance from the dispensers.
So in spite of the limitations, PIDS in game is actually more flexible than it should be.
